6 ms·

The curious case of Norway’s demon wall (2021)

119 points by Petiver 4y ago

blowski 4y ago
What’s so weird about this? If he’d painted flowers we’d have all said “how lovely!”. Maybe he liked painting demons, it doesn’t make him demonic.
- FearNotDaniel 4y ago
  But he was not an artist, but a conservator. His job was to restore the existing historical painting, not create a new one from his imagination. He was, by all accounts, extremely meticulous about that in all other assignments apart from this one. Other than that, if he "liked painting demons" there would be notebooks and canvases full of the stuff at home. There were none. So the fact that this is a one-off, extremely serious breach of professional etiquette, combined with an obsession with a subject matter he was not otherwise interested in, does indeed make it rather weird. I find it really interesting that you are defending against a claim that was never made in the article - the possibility of him being "demonic". Personally I found it strange that the piece speculated so much from a psychological angle but didn't remotely mention the spiritual, while my thoughts on reading were exactly that - perhaps the person or place was under some kind of demonic possession and this is the outcome of a spiritual attack. A little instance of the world we don't understand spilling over into the one we do. "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist." - Keyser Söze, after Baudelaire
  - akomtu 4y ago
    Looking at that picture, I'm not seeing anything demonic or disturbing in it. This view is often seen by people under influence of drugs or alcohol, if they ever manage to remember details, and this gives a plausible explanation: the author was high that time, and must've confused his otherwise banal vision with something important.
    - blowski 4y ago
      It reminds me of that guy who squiggled over his whole house. Demons make interesting shapes.
    - rng_civ 4y ago
      That might be possible, but according to the article, the images were created over the course of two years. If the conservator was under the influence of drugs or alcohol for that long, I would imagine signs would have showed up in his other jobs, in his personal documents, or in other aspects of his life (the vicar didn't note that much substance consumption?) Regardless of the cause, I'm quite interested in what the conservator's reaction to it would have been if/when he realized he did not actually conserve the original art. I've watched a few art conversations (Baumgartner Restoration on YouTube is great!) and there's a huge pride in accurately reproducing/restoring the original.
      - akomtu 4y ago
        He was under influence once (e.g. a delirium episode), he saw that vision once and it really impressed him. The true importance of these demons is that of mosquitos: they are unimpressive, but drugs may distort visuals so mosquitos appear as dragons for example.
    - Broken_Hippo 4y ago
      I've used drugs. I've generally been casual about it (save for nicotine and sometimes THC), but it means that I've met a few actual users in my time. Most folks aren't seeing demons, and especially not enough to do a 2-year secret art project while on drugs. It is, honestly, more common for a businessperson to have a secret drug habits. I'd also like to point out that folks have seen demons for quite some time in history without having it fueled by drugs: Religion can fuel this, especially when combined with little understanding of the observable world around you. And lastly, just because you don't see anything demonic nor disturbing doesn't actually take away from it being such to others. I put random eyes in artwork sometimes: I like it, but it really makes some folks' skin crawl. They definitely have different opinions than I do.
  - trasz 4y ago
    >under some kind of demonic possession You spelled “miracle” wrong.
  - kergonath 4y ago
    > does indeed make it rather weird. A fascinating case indeed. It’s interesting to speculate about what could explain what happened. > Personally I found it strange that the piece speculated so much from a psychological angle but didn't remotely mention the spiritual, while my thoughts on reading were exactly that - perhaps the person or place was under some kind of demonic possession and this is the outcome of a spiritual attack. Because mania and delirium are things that actually happen and can be caused by many things (somebody else mentioned ergotism; there are other things that cause behaviours that can be interpreted as religious); demonic possession does not. > "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist." - Keyser Söze, after Baudelaire I would not trust a 19th century poet with syphilis and off his face on absinth to tell me what is true and what is not. Besides the logical fallacy embedded in that specific quote.
formerkrogemp 4y ago
Fascinating stuff. The demonveggen reminds of something in an art museum: compelling and disturbing all at once.
mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
I wonder if – assuming it's not forged or a product of hallucination/pareidolia – this was created during the bubonic plague epidemic in Europe in the 14th century. Priests would travel around to farms to "treat" the ill. And no doubt see some fucked up shit in the process.
- FearNotDaniel 4y ago
  No. The work was created in the 20th century by a conservator going rogue, for reasons unknown, and completely ignoring the underlying painting that he was supposed to restore.
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
    That's not a confirmed theory at all. It seems likely, yes, but not confirmed.
    - FearNotDaniel 4y ago
      I wouldn't say it's only a "theory" that remnants of a 16th/17th century (not 14th) mural depicting biblical figures were present before Gotaas turned up. That is clearly documented. I mean, you could make a very far-fetched hypothesis that under this work was another, much older work, unlike anything else ever known to be produced at the time, which Gotaas somehow discovered and restored without telling anyone else and without stopping to ask whether they would prefer this to be restored instead of the biblical scene they had originally asked him to take a look at. But there is absolutely zero evidence that any of the figures depicted by Gotaas were present before he began his "restoration".
      - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
        I'm aware it's far fetched and I don't even really believe it, and there is no evidence like you say, but it's also kind of hard since there doesn't seem to have been a huge amount of analysis done before his work. To me this is one of those things we'll basically never know the answer to; the crucial information(state of the mural before the restoration) is lost to history. It reminds me of the Voynich manuscript in that sense. I was just captivated by the idea of some 14th century priest losing his mind and doing this. But yeah, not exactly likely.
andrewflnr 4y ago
> He was skilled enough to invent a credible fake in the style of a 17th-century mural. What if he didn't want to, though? What if the joke was to do something ridiculous and make people take it seriously? In short, what if he was trolling? If he was, you have to give a certain respect to a man who spends his whole career building credibility to burn on a single high-effort, high impact prank, never losing his straight face even with his son who somehow has to go along with it. Not necessarily an admirable man, but an impressive man. Or maybe it was just a mental health episode oddly confined to a particular time, place, and role in the man's life with no known side effects. That could happen, I guess.
- Maursault 4y ago
  > Or maybe it was just a mental health episode oddly confined to a particular time, place, and role in the man's life with no known side effects. That could happen, I guess. My first impression was that Gotaas suffered symptoms of pareidolia[1] caused by ergotism.[2][3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergotism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergotism [3] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.944.4459&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.94...
pvaldes 4y ago
Too much effort to be a joke. I see several possibilities 1. Non deliberate poisoning Meat is hard to find in war times. A diet with too much legumes or spinach is rich in vegetable toxins that the plants use as defense. Expecting humble substandard quality food seems appropriate when living in a small village vicar's house, unable to even afford accurate heating in the church. Meat is rich in zinc. If we combine a meatless diet with plant toxins that block zinc absorption and all of this with paint, we can end with paint poisoning. Calcium dust could raise the calcium intake and calcium competes with zinc absorption. Chrome salts in the paint may mess also somehow with the capability to absorb zinc. Altered levels of zinc in the blood are directly linked with schizophrenia. 2. Revenge Not the type of "you scammed and didn't pay me, so I will work for two years more in miserable conditions". Maybe a serious grunt or a strong dislike for the priest in charge would lead to a statement of "this church is not a good place and is filled with demons forever now". The higher number of demons, the better. Could be related with something that happened to him, or to his son, or with some rumors circulating about the priest . Is unclear how the priest would not notice even the bigger figures. Either the didn't, or prefer not to sue him or disclose the case, for several reasons. There are also other two hypothetical explanations, very unlikely but not impossible 3. Disguise The draw is a disguise. Maybe with the complicity of the priest. The elaborate and dense figures in some places mixed with bigger and less dense figures in other would be hiding chunks of an hypothetical previous text that could be seen as a shame, politically dangerous just before 1940, or blasphemous but without destroying it entirely for a possible historical value. Maybe a statement in jewish marking the church as a sanctuary place, or a few phrases in cyrillic, runes or other foreign language that would be not evident to spot for a non native. Some alphabet with a lot of pairs of circles that could be refactored logically as eyes. Lots and lots of them. The priest would not want it disclosed as would harm his reputation as caretaker of an historical building or reduce his income, but just painting white over the previous religious picture would guarantee a lot of undesirable interest. Claiming that they were restoring it and drawing over it to achieve a grey effect would be a "safer" compromise solution. 4. Deliberate poisoning By himself (Amanita mushrooms?) is unlikely as is an isolated case in his career and would not lead to such meticulous work. His son would have noticed also that something was not right. The figures are strange but still realistic and not distorted. If by a third part there is not an obvious reason to do it, and he would not voluntarily return to the place after this.
okintheory 4y ago
People might be reading too much into the 'demon' stuff: At least in Denmark, all medieval churches had devils painted on the ceiling. Could be the guy just thought it fit well in this Norwegian church too?
austinjp 4y ago
Someone please scan this, extract all the faces, and create an avatar generator.
yencabulator 4y ago
> The lines of the painting are so fine that the tiniest figures seem to pull the viewer into an infinite Satanic menagerie. Ooh. Someone ML up a XaoS-style zooming fractal menagerie! https://xaos-project.github.io/ https://xaos-project.github.io/

119 points by Petiver 4y ago

What’s so weird about this? If he’d painted flowers we’d have all said “how lovely!”. Maybe he liked painting demons, it doesn’t make him demonic.

FearNotDaniel 4y ago
But he was not an artist, but a conservator. His job was to restore the existing historical painting, not create a new one from his imagination. He was, by all accounts, extremely meticulous about that in all other assignments apart from this one. Other than that, if he "liked painting demons" there would be notebooks and canvases full of the stuff at home. There were none. So the fact that this is a one-off, extremely serious breach of professional etiquette, combined with an obsession with a subject matter he was not otherwise interested in, does indeed make it rather weird. I find it really interesting that you are defending against a claim that was never made in the article - the possibility of him being "demonic". Personally I found it strange that the piece speculated so much from a psychological angle but didn't remotely mention the spiritual, while my thoughts on reading were exactly that - perhaps the person or place was under some kind of demonic possession and this is the outcome of a spiritual attack. A little instance of the world we don't understand spilling over into the one we do. "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist." - Keyser Söze, after Baudelaire
- akomtu 4y ago
  Looking at that picture, I'm not seeing anything demonic or disturbing in it. This view is often seen by people under influence of drugs or alcohol, if they ever manage to remember details, and this gives a plausible explanation: the author was high that time, and must've confused his otherwise banal vision with something important.
  - blowski 4y ago
    It reminds me of that guy who squiggled over his whole house. Demons make interesting shapes.
  - rng_civ 4y ago
    That might be possible, but according to the article, the images were created over the course of two years. If the conservator was under the influence of drugs or alcohol for that long, I would imagine signs would have showed up in his other jobs, in his personal documents, or in other aspects of his life (the vicar didn't note that much substance consumption?) Regardless of the cause, I'm quite interested in what the conservator's reaction to it would have been if/when he realized he did not actually conserve the original art. I've watched a few art conversations (Baumgartner Restoration on YouTube is great!) and there's a huge pride in accurately reproducing/restoring the original.
    - akomtu 4y ago
      He was under influence once (e.g. a delirium episode), he saw that vision once and it really impressed him. The true importance of these demons is that of mosquitos: they are unimpressive, but drugs may distort visuals so mosquitos appear as dragons for example.
  - Broken_Hippo 4y ago
    I've used drugs. I've generally been casual about it (save for nicotine and sometimes THC), but it means that I've met a few actual users in my time. Most folks aren't seeing demons, and especially not enough to do a 2-year secret art project while on drugs. It is, honestly, more common for a businessperson to have a secret drug habits. I'd also like to point out that folks have seen demons for quite some time in history without having it fueled by drugs: Religion can fuel this, especially when combined with little understanding of the observable world around you. And lastly, just because you don't see anything demonic nor disturbing doesn't actually take away from it being such to others. I put random eyes in artwork sometimes: I like it, but it really makes some folks' skin crawl. They definitely have different opinions than I do.
- trasz 4y ago
  >under some kind of demonic possession You spelled “miracle” wrong.
- kergonath 4y ago
  > does indeed make it rather weird. A fascinating case indeed. It’s interesting to speculate about what could explain what happened. > Personally I found it strange that the piece speculated so much from a psychological angle but didn't remotely mention the spiritual, while my thoughts on reading were exactly that - perhaps the person or place was under some kind of demonic possession and this is the outcome of a spiritual attack. Because mania and delirium are things that actually happen and can be caused by many things (somebody else mentioned ergotism; there are other things that cause behaviours that can be interpreted as religious); demonic possession does not. > "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist." - Keyser Söze, after Baudelaire I would not trust a 19th century poet with syphilis and off his face on absinth to tell me what is true and what is not. Besides the logical fallacy embedded in that specific quote.

formerkrogemp 4y ago

Fascinating stuff. The demonveggen reminds of something in an art museum: compelling and disturbing all at once.

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago

I wonder if – assuming it's not forged or a product of hallucination/pareidolia – this was created during the bubonic plague epidemic in Europe in the 14th century. Priests would travel around to farms to "treat" the ill. And no doubt see some fucked up shit in the process.

FearNotDaniel 4y ago
No. The work was created in the 20th century by a conservator going rogue, for reasons unknown, and completely ignoring the underlying painting that he was supposed to restore.
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
  That's not a confirmed theory at all. It seems likely, yes, but not confirmed.
  - FearNotDaniel 4y ago
    I wouldn't say it's only a "theory" that remnants of a 16th/17th century (not 14th) mural depicting biblical figures were present before Gotaas turned up. That is clearly documented. I mean, you could make a very far-fetched hypothesis that under this work was another, much older work, unlike anything else ever known to be produced at the time, which Gotaas somehow discovered and restored without telling anyone else and without stopping to ask whether they would prefer this to be restored instead of the biblical scene they had originally asked him to take a look at. But there is absolutely zero evidence that any of the figures depicted by Gotaas were present before he began his "restoration".
    - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
      I'm aware it's far fetched and I don't even really believe it, and there is no evidence like you say, but it's also kind of hard since there doesn't seem to have been a huge amount of analysis done before his work. To me this is one of those things we'll basically never know the answer to; the crucial information(state of the mural before the restoration) is lost to history. It reminds me of the Voynich manuscript in that sense. I was just captivated by the idea of some 14th century priest losing his mind and doing this. But yeah, not exactly likely.

andrewflnr 4y ago

> He was skilled enough to invent a credible fake in the style of a 17th-century mural. What if he didn't want to, though? What if the joke was to do something ridiculous and make people take it seriously? In short, what if he was trolling? If he was, you have to give a certain respect to a man who spends his whole career building credibility to burn on a single high-effort, high impact prank, never losing his straight face even with his son who somehow has to go along with it. Not necessarily an admirable man, but an impressive man. Or maybe it was just a mental health episode oddly confined to a particular time, place, and role in the man's life with no known side effects. That could happen, I guess.

Maursault 4y ago
> Or maybe it was just a mental health episode oddly confined to a particular time, place, and role in the man's life with no known side effects. That could happen, I guess. My first impression was that Gotaas suffered symptoms of pareidolia[1] caused by ergotism.[2][3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergotism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergotism [3] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.944.4459&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.94...

pvaldes 4y ago

Too much effort to be a joke. I see several possibilities 1. Non deliberate poisoning Meat is hard to find in war times. A diet with too much legumes or spinach is rich in vegetable toxins that the plants use as defense. Expecting humble substandard quality food seems appropriate when living in a small village vicar's house, unable to even afford accurate heating in the church. Meat is rich in zinc. If we combine a meatless diet with plant toxins that block zinc absorption and all of this with paint, we can end with paint poisoning. Calcium dust could raise the calcium intake and calcium competes with zinc absorption. Chrome salts in the paint may mess also somehow with the capability to absorb zinc. Altered levels of zinc in the blood are directly linked with schizophrenia. 2. Revenge Not the type of "you scammed and didn't pay me, so I will work for two years more in miserable conditions". Maybe a serious grunt or a strong dislike for the priest in charge would lead to a statement of "this church is not a good place and is filled with demons forever now". The higher number of demons, the better. Could be related with something that happened to him, or to his son, or with some rumors circulating about the priest . Is unclear how the priest would not notice even the bigger figures. Either the didn't, or prefer not to sue him or disclose the case, for several reasons. There are also other two hypothetical explanations, very unlikely but not impossible 3. Disguise The draw is a disguise. Maybe with the complicity of the priest. The elaborate and dense figures in some places mixed with bigger and less dense figures in other would be hiding chunks of an hypothetical previous text that could be seen as a shame, politically dangerous just before 1940, or blasphemous but without destroying it entirely for a possible historical value. Maybe a statement in jewish marking the church as a sanctuary place, or a few phrases in cyrillic, runes or other foreign language that would be not evident to spot for a non native. Some alphabet with a lot of pairs of circles that could be refactored logically as eyes. Lots and lots of them. The priest would not want it disclosed as would harm his reputation as caretaker of an historical building or reduce his income, but just painting white over the previous religious picture would guarantee a lot of undesirable interest. Claiming that they were restoring it and drawing over it to achieve a grey effect would be a "safer" compromise solution. 4. Deliberate poisoning By himself (Amanita mushrooms?) is unlikely as is an isolated case in his career and would not lead to such meticulous work. His son would have noticed also that something was not right. The figures are strange but still realistic and not distorted. If by a third part there is not an obvious reason to do it, and he would not voluntarily return to the place after this.

okintheory 4y ago

People might be reading too much into the 'demon' stuff: At least in Denmark, all medieval churches had devils painted on the ceiling. Could be the guy just thought it fit well in this Norwegian church too?

austinjp 4y ago

Someone please scan this, extract all the faces, and create an avatar generator.

yencabulator 4y ago

> The lines of the painting are so fine that the tiniest figures seem to pull the viewer into an infinite Satanic menagerie. Ooh. Someone ML up a XaoS-style zooming fractal menagerie! https://xaos-project.github.io/ https://xaos-project.github.io/